CA October 7 - Civil rights groups ask appeals court to delay Oct. 7 election

The Sacramento Bee ^ | 08-28-03 | Claire Cooper

[Alia]

Civil rights groups on Wednesday appealed for a delay in California's recall election, warning of "a very real risk that the margin of victory will be less than the margin of error" of punch-card voting machines in six heavily minority counties.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Funny thing. They (these liberals so worried about minority "representation") DIDN'T protest ( nor did the republican chickens!) when the "margin of error" that donated a Senate seat win in South Dakota to a democrat WAS LESS THAN THE MARGIN OF DEMOCRATIC FRAUD!

[DoctorZIn]

PING!

Your One Stop Resource For All The California Recall News!

Want on our daily or major news ping lists? Freepmail DoctorZin.

[truth_seeker]

Do the discriminatory voting machines only hang chads, for minorities?

I had thought we'd come a long way from that era, and that now all of our voting machines were "equal opportunity chad hangers."

[pogo101]

Would this result be a hoot?

COURT (to Plaintiffs): "By golly, you guys are right. Those darned punch-card ballots DO render elections unfair. Including the 2002 general election, which none of y'all said ANYTHING against! So we're going to void the result of THAT election, namely Davis's re-election. You'll just have to hold a new election, hm?"

[Phantom Lord]

If the voting systems in those counties were good enough to elect Davis they are good enough to recall Davis.

Request denied.

[Alia]

Phantom, you are quite right. However, the lawsuits contend: a.) "we need time to properly educate these "disenfranchised voters" and b) "It's Florida 2000, all over again!"

How does one argue against legal hidious racism writ large? Two years ago (or more) Secty of State had budgetted funds to update the voting machines in Monterey, etc. What happened to the money? What happened to updating these machines? It's the question not-the-media is NOT asking. At all. Oh. Right. Davis' Budget. Community colleges have been promised, and were budgeted to receive billions of dollars. They didn't. Right. Davis' budget.

[SunStar]

Oh, jeez. Not this crap again...

[Alia]

lol. Yes -- that would be a hoot! But it would be ignored by the usual "suspects"

Their retort would be... "we need a lot of time to walk each voter through the process, and to show them exactly what "holes" to punch. October 7th doesn't give us enuff time to draw "figure people" pictures.(this makes me ill just saying it; but this is exactly how Maldef/aclu is coming cross to me -- they pretend to be "caring" but they are painting limited english speaking people as STUPID. That grates on me...)

[SunStar]

... the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals expected to set a briefing schedule and hearing date for the American Civil Liberties Union-led case today.

This is the Kangaroo court that ruled "under God" unconstitutional in the Pledge of Allegiance.

[Alia]

It is amazing to me. The chad thing. I do know that former Sectry of CA, Bill Jones, had budgetted funds to update those districts' "voting" equipments. It hasn't been done.

[SuziQ]

Are these voting locations the same ones used for the election last year? If so, why didn't these same people protest then?

[Alia]

Dear Suzie -- what a superb question. But again, I don't quite think the issue is really about "voting", and how they vote. It's about "educating" (indoctrinating?) these minority voters about (against) Prop 54 -- Racial Privacy Initiative. The plaintiffs and the "group leaders" need more time to do this. The basis of the suits appear to be about "voting" and using these old machines. But I don't really think it is about these machines...

[hresources]

Same Court. Constantly get overturned by Supremes. You can probably bet they will vote for delay and then someone will get a Supreme out bed to issue a stay.

[Alia]

I remember this. I seem to also recall members of the 9th (but maybe it was ONLY Pelosi?) asserting that the 9th circuit members MUST base their decisions upon their local constituents. Sounds like a perpetual election to me! lol. Obviously, the 9th isn't necessarily concerned about interpreting constitutional laws.. but... representing their "voting" base. After CA voters passed Prop 209, Thelton Henderson OF the 9th circuit, tried to pull a Judge Phaelzer (sp) in re Prop 187. Henderson essentially argued that the people didn't REALLY know what they were voting on, ergo, the passage of 209 didn't really count.... He lost. Thank you, Manny Klauser. :)

[pogo101]

Anyone interested in snowplowing through the appellants' (that's the bad guys) brief can find it here.

[Alia]

Yep. We'll see Friday. However, I don't think they are going to win their case.

http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2003/08/04/daily20.html

Supreme Court expedites recall decisions With five lawsuits challenging various aspects of California's first-ever recall against a governor and faced with a scheduled Oct. 7 vote, the state Supreme Court has put the cases on a fast track to decisions.

Gov. Gray Davis on Monday sued the state, contending the recall, if it is held, should be scheduled for the March 2004 primary ballot instead of a special election this fall. His suit (Davis v. Shelley, S117921) also seeks to put his name on the second portion of the ballot in which a new governor would be elected if voters approved his recall on the first portion of the ballot.

The opposition brief in this case is due at 9 a.m., Aug. 6. The reply brief is due at 9 a.m. the following day.

The other suits include:

· Eisenberg v. Shelley, S117763. (Involves two initiatives that would appear on the recall ballot.)

· Frankel v. Shelley, S117770. (Involves listing other candidates on the recall ballot.)

· Byrnes v. Bustamante, S117832. (Involves listing other candidates on the recall ballot.)

· Burton (Mark) v. Shelley, S117834. (Involves qualifications of other candidates on recall ballot.)

In these cases, the court has set noon Aug. 6 for the filing of the final written briefs. **end of article

Some of the lost cases, have appealed their loss to higher courts.

[pogo101]

After CA voters passed Prop 209, Thelton Henderson OF the 9th circuit, tried to pull a Judge Phaelzer (sp) in re Prop 187. Henderson essentially argued that the people didn't REALLY know what they were voting on, ergo, the passage of 209 didn't really count.... He lost

To pick a nit: Henderson was and is a District Court (i.e., trial-court level) judge. Although his S.F. court is within the 9th Circuit, usually one wouldn't refer to him as a "9th Circuit judge."

Yep, he enjoined enforcement of Prop 209, but the Ninth Circuit reversed him. (122 F.3d 692 (9th Cir. 1997).) Two of the 3 judges on the appellate panel, O'Scannlain and Kleinfeld, are among the circuit's few conservatives.

[BunnySlippers]

Even after Florida Democrats are STILL too dumb to vote!

[ridesthemiles]

If those machines have been good enough to hold elections for over 50 years, then ALL of the current members of Congress, and ALL state houses, etc. are in their places because of these machines.
Davis got there with these machines and didn't complain one whit. NOT A PEEP.
The post I found in the past 3 days about how easily the electronic machines are manipulated scares the dickens out of me. And if we vote electronically in the future, where is the data for a "Hand count"?
If we can be hacked and spammed, what makes these machines so great? Give me a manual ballot, where I can mark in pencil what I want and it can be kept for any amount of time into the future for counting problems and recounts. I will be happy to sign my ballot when the voters going into the booth and the ballots don't match..And I predict that day is close at hand.